God's truth about hell

[Checkpoint]

This thread stems from this short beginning exchange about hell and truth:


Checkpoint wrote:

Hi again, Pinseeker.

What is it that makes them "truths" rather than "untruths", as you see them, in brief ?

What specifically makes them "very hard truths", do you think?

Pinseeker wrote

Hey, Checkpoint.

I guess the only way to answer the first question is, if God says it, it's true.

To the second, I would say "very hard truths" does not mean "very difficult-to-undertand truths." What I mean is, many people do not want to hear about hell, and/or do not want to accept God's truth about hell. It scares them, it offends them, it's obcene to them... etc. Even believers like me just... well, I shudder at it. It... well, it scares the H-E-double-toothpick out of me. But it's important, even vital to our understanding of the Gospel. Take a look at this if you want:

https://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/hell/[/quote]

Checkpoint responded

Ah yes Pinseeker, what you say here raises questions rather than gives answers, in my opinion.

1) Do we really grasp what "God's truth about hell" actually is?

2) In what way is it "important, even vital, to our understanding of the Gospel"?

3) Why is there such strong, even visceral, reaction to "God's truth about hell", so often expressed by both believers and unbelievers?

4) Who, or what, is being questioned here? God, or the Bible, or an interpretation?

Please discuss, debate, and/or give your answer to any of these questions, or just comment or make an observation.

[tam]

Peace to you Pinseeker, and please understand that I have not taken offense at your disagreement.

The explanations you provided in our earlier conversation (which you have not replied TO), were untrue.

In your opinion. I understand. I most certainly did reply, just not to your satisfaction. This I understand also.

It is not just my opinion that the things you stated proved to be untrue.

Tammy, as with Checkpoint, I mean this with the utmost respect, but here, you're backing up your opinion with... your opinion.

As respectfully as I can possibly say, it is in fact your opinion that what you and others have said here with regard to Scripture or otherwise has proved what I have said about Scripture untrue. I can easily claim otherwise -- and do -- and you can argue in exactly the same way -- and correctly -- that that is my opinion. It seems we should both be able to accept that. I do. Grace and peace to you.

Did you read the entire post that you are responding to here? Because your response indicates that you may have stopped after this one sentence. The sentence that follows reads thus:

You had originally stated that if annihilation were true, that would make God a murderer. But upon closer examination of your claim - which is why I asked the questions I asked, so as to dig deeper into certain claims - even you agreed that God would not be a murderer.




Your claim that God would be a murderer if annihilation were true was not a scriptural claim (it was your opinion). Scripture would in fact reveal otherwise, since murder is the unlawful taking of life (to which you agreed) and were God (the Judge) to sentence a person to death, He would not be committing murder. You agreed, did you not?




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[PinSeeker]

Your claim that God would be a murderer if annihilation were true was not a scriptural claim (it was your opinion).

My "claim," Tammy, is that, from an eternal (not temporal) perspective -- and, not to say "I see from the eternal perspective," but God tells us what that is -- God will not and does not annihilate anything that He created good -- which is everything, according to Genesis 1, all of Creation. If He did, He would be killing without just cause, the very definition of murder. In this way, He would be violating His own eternal decree and His own perfect justice. No, you will not find these exact words in Scripture, but it is clearly communicated throughout. You have disagreed with this, which is certainly your prerogative.

Further, though, coupled with that is the fact that yes, God does sentence unbelievers to death as a result of the Judgment. This satisfies His perfect justice and does not entail committing murder in any shape, form, or fashion. We agree on that, and always did. The problem, though, is and continues to be -- as continues to be the case with several other posters here -- your mistaken understanding of what Biblical death really is. It is a permanent separation of the person from God's redeemed and made-very-good-again (renewed) creation, the New Heaven and New Earth, and from God's life-giving grace, and is the sending away of the person into this this place/realm of "outer darkness" and under His judgment, devoid of His life-giving grace; this is their eternal punishment, and it is a torment (their worm that will not die) and a metaphorical "fire" to them from which they cannot escape.

Grace and peace to you.

[myth-one.com]

Your claim that God would be a murderer if annihilation were true was not a scriptural claim (it was your opinion).

My "claim," Tammy, is that, from an eternal (not temporal) perspective -- and, not to say "I see from the eternal perspective," but God tells us what that is -- God will not and does not annihilate anything that He created good -- which is everything, according to Genesis 1, all of Creation. If He did, He would be killing without just cause, the very definition of murder. In this way, He would be violating His own eternal decree and His own perfect justice. No, you will not find these exact words in Scripture, but it is clearly communicated throughout. You have disagreed with this, which is certainly your prerogative.

Further, though, coupled with that is the fact that yes, God does sentence unbelievers to death as a result of the Judgment. This satisfies His perfect justice and does not entail committing murder in any shape, form, or fashion. We agree on that, and always did. The problem, though, is and continues to be -- as continues to be the case with several other posters here -- your mistaken understanding of what Biblical death really is. It is a permanent separation of the person from God's redeemed and made-very-good-again (renewed) creation, the New Heaven and New Earth, and from God's life-giving grace, and is the sending away of the person into this this place/realm of "outer darkness" and under His judgment, devoid of His life-giving grace; this is their eternal punishment, and it is a torment (their worm that will not die) and a metaphorical "fire" to them from which they cannot escape.

Grace and peace to you.

God does not make the decision about everyone's eternity.

Each person will make their own choice between everlasting life and death:

I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: (Deuteronomy 30:19)

Life and death are opposite choices!

If one chooses death, then after they die the second death, they never live again -- as the punishment lasts for all eternity.

Even the memory of their existence is gone.

Likewise, if one chooses life, then they live forever and ever, and can never exit life.

That's what the scriptures state -- not just my opinion:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 317 by PinSeeker]

Checkpoint wrote:

The differences we have in this ongoing debate, I suggest, stem from our fundamentally different starting points, one in Genesis 1 and the other in Genesis 2. These inform us and color how we read and interpret later Scriptures such as those you summarised. Hence, for example, your explanation of "separation" outlined here, differs markedly from what we would say.

Pinseeker wrote:

All I would say to this is... well, two things, and in this order:

1. All of what I say to you, Checkpoint -- and everyone else here as well -- is prefaced with the utmost due respect.

2. What you say here, from where I stand, is in my view pure and unadulterated rationalization. Genesis 2 is no more -- and no less -- important than Genesis 1.

In what way is what I said above "pure and unadulterated rationalization"?

The importance of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 is not in question, and is not in competition.

What is in question, what is in competition, in this debate concerning "the truth about hell", is their suitability as a reliable start point.

Grace and peace to you.
Checkpoint wrote:

[Checkpoint]

Checkpoint wrote:

We will either be given eternal life, or lose temporary life by being put back to sleep, this last time, permanently, in eternal death, which is The Second Death.

Pinseeker responded:

Nope. "Lose temporary life"? That doesn't even make sense. I guess that's a sneaky way of saying those on Jesus's left cease to exist, and that's surely not the case.

It makes sense when Jesus says it..

Luke 9:

24 For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it.
25 What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit their very self?

And you think He was talking about the first death there? Or the second? Surely not; neither is the case.

It is but it isn't. It isn't but it is.

LOL! I'm at a loss, here...

It makes sense and is relevant to our discussion.

Okay, I'll bite. How so?

Luke 9:24 -25 is quite clearly about the choices we make in this life that will determine our future Judgment decision gain or loss. This connection is absolutely confirmed in the very next verse, 26.

God bless.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 325 by Checkpoint]

Yes but what biblically is the punishment for choosing wickedness?

[myth-one.com]

[Replying to post 325 by Checkpoint]

Yes but what biblically is the punishment for choosing wickedness?

...the wages of sin is death; (Romans 6:23)

[Charles]

[Replying to post 265 by Charles]

Psalm 9:17 does not mean that people will go back to the grave from whence they originally came. The meaning is more accurately portrayed by the following translation:
"The wicked will retreat toward the Grave, all the nations who forget God."
Big difference. The only translation that makes sense.

Changing return to to read to retreat to is only reasonable if your theology demands such an eisegetical interpretation to bolster its failings.

Rather than a "change," the meaning is more clearly presented with the word "retreat." Let's use our power of reason and look at the word "return." How can a human being "return" to the grave? No amount of philosophizing can really convince us that we were once in the grave and somehow escaped it. To "retreat" to the grave makes much more sense. At least to my own power of reason.

Here is where our biased pre-suppositions compel our understanding.

1. MY bias that we are spirits, created by GOD in HIS image, who have been given a body here on earth that will die when the spirit leaves it and it goes to the grave (the state of decay whether in the ground or not) but the spirit does not 'die'. This is supported to my mind by our return to Sheol, the place of the waiting disembodied and by the fact it is written we are sown, planted here into the world (implying being somewhere else before our being planted), not created here, since the devil sows also.

2. Your bias that we are not spirits but bodies only and that Sheol must then mean grave only, informs your understanding that a return to Sheol is meaningless and therefore the meaning must be adjusted to fit...

In light of the face meaning of return being the accurate rendering of the word ש�וּב - shub, that is twisted away from what is written by all the other meanings, gives me confidence that I chose the right definition of our essential being as spirit so many years ago.

So I do not argue your definitions by which you understand the verse but speaking to those who share my view that we are in essence spirit that this verse suggests that we came to our bodies from a place in the spirit world (probably, maybe Sheol) having been created pre-earth.

[Charles]

This is where it's good to look at the Hebrew. JPS has "Let the wicked be in Sheol"(the dirt) with a footnote that some say "return to" dirt. The reason is that we are Nephesh(dirt and the breath of God). So we die and God's breath returns to him and we become dirt, again. Its not a place where we exist as a spirit but the dirt from whence God raised us. Root of sheol is seol which is where the whole "soul" thing came from originally. Hopefully this helps here.

It would seem that our word soul is older than the Greek or Hebrew intrusions into our English consciousness:
Origin
Old English s�wol, s�w(e)l, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch ziel and German Seele.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Your claim that God would be a murderer if annihilation were true was not a scriptural claim (it was your opinion).

My "claim," Tammy, is that, from an eternal (not temporal) perspective -- and, not to say "I see from the eternal perspective," but God tells us what that is -- God will not and does not annihilate anything that He created good -- which is everything, according to Genesis 1, all of Creation. If He did, He would be killing without just cause, the very definition of murder.

If something created as good later corrupted ITSELF, then it would no longer BE good. If God judged such ones to death (destruction, annihilation), it would then be WITH cause, yes?

Can you explain to me how this would be unlawful?

In this way, He would be violating His own eternal decree and His own perfect justice. No, you will not find these exact words in Scripture,

Of course not. Because this is not found in scripture at all.

Further, though, coupled with that is the fact that yes, God does sentence unbelievers to death as a result of the Judgment.

Well, there you go! Is that murder? Of course not!!

I know, you think 'biblical death' does not refer to actual death (where a person is dead and buried). But a person being dead and buried is written of in the bible as well.

This satisfies His perfect justice and does not entail committing murder in any shape, form, or fashion. We agree on that, and always did. The problem, though, is and continues to be -- as continues to be the case with several other posters here -- your mistaken understanding of what Biblical death really is. It is a permanent separation of the person from God's redeemed and made-very-good-again (renewed) creation, the New Heaven and New Earth, and from God's life-giving grace, and is the sending away of the person into this this place/realm of "outer darkness" and under His judgment, devoid of His life-giving grace; this is their eternal punishment, and it is a torment (their worm that will not die) and a metaphorical "fire" to them from which they cannot escape.

Christ (the Truth) described death as a sleep. You seem to be accepting the description of people being "dead" ONLY as a separation from God (but still being conscious and living)... all the while ignoring death where a person is dead and buried.

When a person dies the first death, they are not still conscious and alive in the world of the dead (hades/sheol/"hell"). There is not enough life in the world of the dead for that to be possible. They are asleep (as Christ stated Himself, and He is the One to whom God said to listen), unless they are in the presence of the LIFE (Christ). He is also the one who wakes them... such as when the dead hear His voice so as to come out of their graves, just as Lazarus did when He called Lazarus from the dead. The way you are reading scripture seems to be ignoring that very real example of what happens at a resurrection.


You're taking all mention of death as "figurative" (for lack of a better word), but people truly come out of their graves, there is an actual resurrection of the dead (people who died and were buried); and people will actually be awakened from their death (and slumber).


(Yes, a living person can be awakened as well. And a living person can cross over from death to life, because they have come to Christ - the LIFE - and He is in them. But this is not the 'sleep' that is being referred to with the first and second resurrections.)


The first resurrection is for those who are in Christ who die before He returns (and there is no judgment for them, because they already crossed over from death to life). The second resurrection (the resurrection of the dead) is for those who died but who are not in Christ. These ones will be resurrected as well - some to a resurrection of life and others to a resurrection of judgment (and the second death).

Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming when all who are in their graves will hear His voice and come out— those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.
John 5:28, 29


See also Rev 20:12, 13



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy